Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 1, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:28:19

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #101

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of The Lotus Eaters for Thursday, the 1st of April 2021.
	We're not going to be making any April Fool's jokes because I'm a bit of a killjoy like that.
	Everyone else is bound to be making them, and honestly, I hate confusing the issues.
	And because, frankly, everything is so goddamn ridiculous that...
	I mean, it feels like every day is April Fool's Day.
	You wouldn't believe us.
	Yeah, you wouldn't believe us.
	Yeah, exactly.
	How would you know?
	You know, by the way, there was a race report and all the race grifters are angry because it turned out we're not racists.
	Haha, April Fool's.
	Is that April Fool's or is that something that really happened?
	You'll find out in a bit.
	But anyway, if you'd like to support us, you can go to lotuses.com and sign up and become a premium member.
	We've got loads of great premium content already on there.
	Loads, in fact.
	But what we have is...
	When's the book club going up, John?
	Tomorrow.
	Book Club tomorrow for Brave New World.
	It's been a long time coming.
	We're also going to record a premium podcast after this about the recent kerfuffle around David Lammy's personal identity.
	And this has become a big political issue in Britain.
	And so I figure it'd be worth talking about.
	But before then, we're going to be talking about the George Floyd trial newscast.
	Sorry, no, the trial of Derek Chauvin.
	We shouldn't call it the George Floyd trial.
	No, because there is a concept here, which is who killed him?
	Is it George Floyd?
	Is it Derek Chauvin?
	So what?
	You're putting George Floyd on trial, are you?
	Well, no.
	The court is.
	I didn't do nothing.
	Anyway, so the trial has been going ahead.
	And I wasn't really going to cover this, because we covered the opening arguments, and it was like, look, this is what this side's going to argue, that's what that side's going to argue.
	And then I was just going to let the whole thing run, and then we'll cover it when it ended.
	I can't get over it.
	We were driving into the work this morning.
	I think we were listening to LBC and just their reporting on it.
	And then I've read a whole bunch of other reporting on it.
	I can't get over how much the mainstream media on this is just openly trying to mislead people.
	Like the LBC one, for example, they gave all the arguments from the prosecution that the cop had killed him with his knee, not the drugs.
	and then whenever they were describing the defense's position they were like the tactics of the defense have been to try and blame it on the drugs he had taken and they wouldn't tell you how much or what they were or that he'd done anything else and then they'd like clipped the audio so all you ever heard was him complaining like oh I can't breathe, I need my mom, blah blah blah and they didn't give you any information about the surrounding pit so I thought okay no it's great We're going to go over some of the bits that they're just not going to show you because I'm sick of seeing these reports and these people misleading folks.
	So hopefully we can do justice to the stuff they're leaving out.
	So the first day happened and it was the opening statements.
	And then there was some witnesses who came out and they questioned the witnesses.
	And the first two weren't particularly interesting.
	The first one was a 911 dispatcher, and the second one was a grocery store worker who was nearby.
	The grocery store worker was completely pointless by the looks of it.
	She didn't really seem to want to be there, so it was a bit of a waste of time.
	The 911 dispatcher was saying that she saw on the screen, she thought the thing had frozen or something when they got him on the ground.
	She was worried for George Floyd, as she says.
	She called 911 to get the police to be called on the police.
	was unbelievable and blah blah blah and then the defense came out and were like right do you have any police training?
	No.
	Are you a police officer?
	No.
	Do you have any idea what the procedures are for arresting someone?
	No.
	You saw something on the screen got worried because you don't know what's going on there not to throw shade at her, I'm sure she's doing a lovely job as a dispatcher but she didn't know what she was looking at and eventually they got her down to admit that what she was looking at was a struggle between officers and a person they were arresting, the struggle ultimately resulting in the squad I'm sure she's doing a lovely job as a dispatcher but she didn't know what And eventually they got her down to admit that what she was looking at was a struggle between officers and a person they were arresting, the struggle ultimately resulting in the squad car shaking back and forth.
	That's what caused her to call the police.
	It's like, right, there's not really much, there's nothing.
	So your testimony was also kind of a waste of time.
	I mean, calling the police on the police isn't exactly the dunk they think it is either.
	It doesn't result in a standoff where police are pointing guns at each other, like going, lay down your arms, we're the police!
	You know, that's not how that works.
	Give up peacefully.
	Exactly, let us arrest you.
	Yeah, but it was just more of the point of like, she's like, oh, this was so horrible to look at, and how dare they do something so out of the norm?
	And then the defence were able to get down to, well, actually, this was just, you called the police because you saw an arrest.
	That's not out of the norm.
	That's normal.
	It's a waste of time to have you here.
	But these are the defenses.
	Sorry, the witnesses being brought by the prosecution.
	So that's a different amount.
	And then the third witness, the final guy for the first day, was a bystander who had come up and witnessed it.
	And he was being treated as some kind of expert because he had a history of knowledge with wrestling and mixed martial arts.
	So, just to emphasize, he is just a bystander witness.
	He is not an expert in the trial to give testimony on what was taking place.
	He's just to say what he saw.
	But that's not how he was treated, of course.
	The media is entirely treating him as some kind of massive expert who knows everything about MMA and knows how chokeholds work and all the rest of it.
	Except that this doesn't seem to be the case.
	So his background was that he used to be a bouncer.
	Sorry, I think he still is a bouncer.
	He has experience with high school and college wrestling and mixed martial arts at a local gym.
	That's it.
	That's not some expert in the field or anything.
	Like, sure, it's more than I know, but that's not why he's there.
	He's there to just say what he saw.
	So I don't know if you can scroll down to the last witness.
	I wonder if there's an image on him, John on here.
	So it's the black guy at the end, just so people can see the different witnesses so they can associate who is who if they see them in the media.
	So this is the chap here.
	And so he lifts off a whole bunch of things that he thinks the whole thing was horrible, prosecution goes back and forth, and eventually he comes down to the argument that what the cop was doing, Derek Chauvin, he was engaging in a blood choke, is the words he used, on George Floyd.
	A blood choke.
	Yeah, so I don't know what any of the terms he was using were, so I looked up a blood choke.
	Apparently it's a choke you do where you restrict the blood flow to the brain and then the person will pass out and then you let go, obviously, because they're passing out.
	And it's used in MMA for overcoming someone.
	Do they usually take nine minutes?
	Yeah, that was the point made by the defense.
	It was like, that usually takes a few seconds, not nine minutes.
	Also, they made the point that apparently you need to do this from both sides, because you need to get two...
	Yeah, you've got two arteries.
	Yeah, not just one.
	And then he had to admit that, yeah, that doesn't make any sense.
	But he was also arguing that Chauvin, when he had his knee on there, he was moving his knee around.
	And this was him, as he says, shimmying.
	So he was shimmy, and then shimmy and shimmy.
	And this is him...
	Choking, sorry, tightening the hold on George Floyd to make sure that he can't breathe or to stop his blood.
	It's like, yeah, but that doesn't make any sense because you can see his knee moving in response to George Floyd moving.
	So when he moves, you have to then rearrange yourself.
	But you can also see that Chauvin, he's just got his hands in his pockets.
	He's not like going on some great wrestling maneuver or anything.
	He actually seems kind of relaxed.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, well, the argument trying to be made here is it was homicide.
	He was sort of trying to kill the guy or something.
	So that was the first part.
	And then on day two, they brought him back in to give more evidence because the fee cut out was a problem.
	And the defense for the cop made a good point, which is that this guy doesn't seem to be some kind of angel who was just walking by.
	He actually made the situation worse.
	So they point out that the MMA guy was threatening police officers.
	So he was threatening the officers who were there.
	He was saying profane words to the officers.
	It's politely like that.
	Did the woman come along and go, don't worry, I've called the police.
	Yeah.
	So she was in a room with cameras.
	She wasn't at the scene.
	Right.
	So they mentioned the Officer Tao, so the Chinese officer, I presume, or Asian officer, I don't know if he's Chinese or anything, had to put his hand on the MMA guy's chest to push him back to the sidewalk, which means that the guy was stepping off the sidewalk and going towards them, which Officer Tao received as aggressive, and then had to push him back to get back on the sidewalk.
	that he was having to calm down other bystanders as some kind of obligation, in which case then the crowd is also by default angry and therefore can be perceived as aggressive.
	And the reason for this kind of arguing, I know the defense, sorry, the prosecution doesn't want to talk about this, but the reason the defense is bringing it up is because it's circumstantial.
	Like the amount of force being used by the police apparently can be determined to what the threat they perceive.
	So if they perceive that the crowd is getting extremely angry as well, then that one argument that takes away their focus, so they're not working as well, but also that they have to be more secure in the scene.
	So, there's that, which means that the crowd was angry from his own words, so it doesn't look great for them.
	And then they just start questioning about the profane language he used, which doesn't sound like it's just, I don't know, criticism?
	Sounds more like a threat?
	And I've just cut it because it's really weird, because his defense is also very strange.
	Let's just play the first clip.
	In that statement, you said, like, I really wanted to beat the s*** out of the police officers.
	You said that.
	Yeah, I did.
	That's what I felt.
	You were angry.
	No, you can't paint me.
	I was angry.
	I wasn't.
	I was in a position where I had to be controlled, a controlled professionalism.
	I wasn't angry because I stayed on the curb.
	Your object is non-responsive.
	Overruled.
	Overruled.
	That sounds good.
	Next question.
	Thank you.
	You started calling them names.
	Yes?
	You heard the video.
	You called him a tough guy, right?
	You watched the video.
	You called him a real man, right?
	You watched the video.
	You do have to answer the question, yes or no, based on what he's asking.
	I'm going to ask you again, so your answers should be yes or no, okay?
	Yes.
	You called him a tough guy.
	I did.
	You called him a real man.
	I did.
	You called him such a man.
	I did.
	You called him bogus.
	I did.
	You called him a bum at least 13 times.
	That's what you counted in the video?
	That's what I counted.
	And that's what you got, 13.
	And that was early on, right?
	Those terms grew more and more angry.
	Would you agree with that?
	They grew more and more pleading for life.
	All right.
	After you called him a bum 13 times, you called him a f***ing bum.
	That's what you heard?
	Did you say that?
	Is that what you heard?
	I'm asking you, sir.
	I'm pretty sure I did.
	Did you say that?
	You heard that.
	I'm pretty sure you did.
	You called him a f*ing pussy ass b*h.
	That's what you heard.
	I'm sure that's what I did.
	I'm asking you.
	Did you say that?
	That's what the video recorded.
	That's what I did.
	You called him a bitch.
	That's a video?
	You heard from the video?
	It's a yes or no, sir.
	That's what was heard in the video?
	Yes, I did.
	Why is he acting like he's on trial?
	And at one point, you said that Officer Tao pushed you.
	That's correct.
	He put his hand in my chest, is what I said.
	And you observed Officer Tao push someone else, right?
	Or feel like he pushed someone else.
	I didn't let him touch anyone else.
	Do you recall saying, I dare you to touch me like that, I swear I'll slap the f*** out of both of you?
	Yeah, I did.
	I meant it.
	So again, sir, it's fair to say that you grew angrier and angrier.
	No, I grew professional and professional and I stayed in my body.
	You can't pay me out to be angry.
	So you can see the state of that.
	He was obviously getting angrier and angrier.
	Can't paint me out to be angry, because it might look bad.
	But then he's being unreasonably combative with the Defence Council as well.
	Like, oh, did I say that?
	We have the tapes, mate.
	You're not on trial for profaning.
	That's not illegal.
	You have to also answer the question.
	Like, you're just here as a witness, nothing else.
	But that's the point.
	You can see in this witness and a lot of the other witnesses, they're clearly coming at this situation with a slanted view.
	That they don't just want to be a witness, they want Derek Chauvin to be sent to jail, regardless of what the truth is.
	They're not there to just say, this happened and this happened, they're there to try and help the prosecution there.
	And just to be clear, for anyone watching who's not familiar with us or anything like that, we don't care if Derek Chauvin goes to jail.
	No, I don't give a toss.
	No, we have absolutely no emotional investment in Derek Chauvin at all.
	I have no involvement or investment in either of them, and that's the reason I'm covering this, is because I don't really care either way.
	But what I can't stand is seeing the media trying to claim that there's only one side to this story, and therefore this guy is clearly a racist, and that's also a condemnation of the United States.
	It's like, come on.
	It's never that simple.
	There are loads of real reasons to condemn the United States.
	It's for Americans.
	Don't worry.
	Just kidding, guys.
	But there's also the point that he says you grew angrier and angrier, and this is one of the main points of the defense, is they're saying they want to show that the crowd that formed was hostile and therefore a threat, and this raises the threshold for reasonable force used by the police to try and defend his client.
	And the defendant there, he says, you grew angrier and angrier.
	And he says, I grew professional and professional.
	It's like, right.
	That's such a politician answer.
	It's an interesting synonym, though.
	If angry is professional to the MMA fighter, I mean, maybe.
	But that's the thing.
	He's not the only one that says this.
	Multiple times with the other defendants as well, when he's trying to make, like, you guys were angry.
	It's very clear that they've all been spoken to for and been coached.
	That you shouldn't say this, you shouldn't give them that edge.
	Which, it's just like, okay, so this is...
	Very interesting, yeah.
	Yeah.
	So the day, the second day then went on, they pulled four minors who were witnesses to come out and give their testimony so they're not shown because they're minors.
	Waste of time, again, mostly, because they're minors.
	They're mostly just sobbing when they're giving their testimony.
	They couldn't have had any idea what was going on because they are minors.
	They couldn't have any idea what happened before or led up to the arrest or what's appropriate or what's not appropriate.
	So, kind of a waste of testimony.
	But what was interesting...
	You say that, but it's very emotive.
	Having a bunch of crying kids?
	That's tugging on their old heartstrings.
	That's the thing.
	We'll go through all of this.
	The prosecution against him haven't actually displayed any evidence that the cop killed George Floyd or that that was the cause of death, his need, not the drugs.
	They haven't argued that point at all in these thirst-free days, which is strange.
	You'd think that would be the central point, but no.
	They're doing the media thing of just bringing out emotional arguments right now.
	Which, I mean, is smart.
	It's a tactic, but it's honest.
	It's smart if you want, when all of this comes to the end, for there to be a massive uprising and riots and burnings and murders.
	Yeah, it's dishonest.
	It's a deceitful thing to do, I think, to try and build this up.
	But when the first miner is giving her testimony, one of the things that was of note was she mentioned that the police officer reached for his pepper spray, which is an indication, again, that the crowd was hostile and the officers perceived that as a threat.
	Whether or not it's proportionate is another statement, but it's evidence that clearly they perceived it as a threat.
	And then when the third miner is giving testimony, there's a videotape played.
	And you can hear MMA bro there saying in the quote, I will kick the F out of you.
	I will kick the F out of you.
	You're a B bro.
	It's like, huh.
	Okay, so it doesn't look great again for the whole idea that he was just standing by.
	More professional and more professional.
	I will kick the F out of you.
	I mean, that's a threat.
	I mean, if he's an MMA bro, that might be a profession.
	It's a professional thing to do.
	So you can also hear one of the people we're about to talk about later, a firefighter who's on the scene, who's out of uniform, obviously, also saying that she is quoted as calling Officer Tau a B-word.
	So, again, being profaned with the police officers, which, you know, not a crime, of course, but it's the indication from the defense here that that's a threat.
	That's all that argument is about.
	It's about nothing else there.
	She, the third minor who's speaking, she also conceded that the bystander crowd around the officers was genuinely angry, and this of course being the circumstantial factor.
	And the other part to include here about the angry crowd is when the ambulance turned up, the ambulance didn't even stick around.
	They got him in the ambulance, moved a few blocks, and then tried to resuscitate him, because again, the paramedics perceived the situation to also be hostile.
	So...
	There is a lot of evidence for that point, so the defense looks pretty good out of that.
	So, then...
	Sorry, I'm just trying to remember where I was.
	Yeah, the minor also continues going back and forth, and the defense gets out of her that she said in a statement that the police checked the pulse multiple times of Floyd before the ambulance got there.
	She claims she had no recollection of saying this, and then he just points out the transcript of the interview.
	I was like, well, there you go.
	There you go.
	She might have just genuinely forgot.
	I have no reason to believe that she was trying to be deceitful.
	And then we get to the firefighter.
	So if we can get the firefighter.
	So this is the lady who did the most fuss out of all of this.
	Didn't go well.
	So she came on and she was a firefighter for one year leading up to the incident.
	She's now been there for two years.
	And she turned up in no uniform and asked for permission from the officers to treat Floyd.
	She had no ID, no uniform.
	All they had was this word of some random woman you've never met that she can help and you've already called the ambulance.
	So they just said no because why wouldn't they?
	Like, why would they take on some random woman they don't have any evidence of her being...
	Imagine if she hadn't been a firefighter and had done something that had directly contributed to George Floyd's death...
	I imagine that the police would have then been legally or somehow professionally liable.
	Yeah.
	So, like, the prosecution kept trying to bring up, like, oh, she could have helped, she could have helped, and it's like, no, not in any way legally could you have done this to be reasonable.
	And even then, medically, if...
	But the medical part as well.
	Yeah.
	So the medical part, they point out that what...
	So they ask her, what would you suggest that the officers do?
	And the thing she suggests is what they did.
	So check the pulse of the guy and call 911 to get paramedics out there.
	Yeah.
	Because they're better trained than a firefighter who has basic medical training.
	of pointless in this case because the whole case is about what killed him was it the drugs he took or was it the knee on the neck which one of those is the cause of death so any other suggestions she had a kind of pointless because like well you didn't know what killed him here yeah no that's what the whole case is about you know so yeah and then after the defense started questioning her she became extremely hostile and really uncooperative Like, really uncooperative?
	Like, just fighting with them for no reason?
	So she insisted that if she was fired...
	So the defense gave her an argument in which she was like, right, let's put you in a similar situation.
	If you're firefighting, you know, you're trying to put out a fire, and a crowd of people turn up and they start hurling names at you, would this harm your ability to do your job?
	She's like, no, no, be fine.
	He's like, right, what if they started threatening you?
	And then became increasingly angry.
	He's like, no, no, everything will be fine.
	And just this came off really bad.
	Yeah.
	Because it's like, this is just really insincere.
	Obviously insincere.
	You're not being honest at all.
	And then she starts arguing for some reason that there's a fire station down the road a couple of blocks and the basic paramedics from them would be faster to get there than the paramedics from the hospital.
	And the defense is just like, why are you bringing this up?
	But it's interesting because it actually brings up that she's bringing into it an argument that the problem here isn't actually with the police but may necessarily be with the dispatch.
	Because if there were closer paramedics and they didn't use them and that ended up with his death...
	Okay, but that's not really what we're arguing about.
	I know, but it's just like she threw it in.
	So the defense is like, okay, thanks.
	Good point.
	Weird.
	The paramedics are responsible for George Floyd's death, aren't they?
	I think she just gets more and more uncooperative to the point where they ask her about a statement she made about the size of George Floyd, I think it was.
	So you described him as a small man.
	He's not a small man.
	He's six foot six.
	He's six foot six.
	He was, what is it, 240 pounds?
	Derek Chauvin's 140 pounds or something like that.
	You can see him in all the videos.
	He's a huge guy.
	Yeah, so they say, did you say he was a small guy?
	And she denies that she ever said this.
	So he's like, okay, I have a transcript.
	And then takes the transcript over to her, gives it to her.
	She refuses to look at it.
	And he's like, look, I know you don't want to look at it, but can you please look at it and read what it says?
	Because you have to.
	And then she is compelled to by the court.
	She reads it.
	And then in response, she tries to explain her way, her own statement.
	She gives a long explanation about why she said this.
	She's like, oh no, because three people were there.
	You see, I'm an idiot, and you shouldn't take what I say seriously.
	What was her excuse?
	I don't know, it was just stupid.
	So then we're just going to play what happened in response to her doing this.
	Yeah, it appeared to, with three grown men on top of somebody, it appeared that he was small and frail.
	Okay.
	But I know that had to be true.
	There's no question.
	I was finishing my answer.
	Counsel, remain.
	Witness, remain.
	The judge just kicks off the jury.
	We're outside the hearing of the jury.
	Ms.
	Hanson, I'm advising you, do not argue with counsel, and specifically, do not argue with the court.
	Are the cameras on?
	No, they are not.
	We are on the record.
	You will not argue with the court.
	You'll not argue with counsel.
	They have the right to ask questions.
	Your job is to answer them.
	I was finishing my answer.
	I will determine when your answer is done.
	And so, do not argue with the court.
	Do not argue with counsel.
	Answer the questions.
	Do not volunteer information that is not requested.
	The attorneys for the state have redirect.
	They can ask you questions if they think that certain things were left out.
	It is the council's prerogative to ask you leading questions and for you to answer those and not volunteer additional information.
	Are we clear on this?
	We're clear.
	Thank you.
	Come back tomorrow at 930.
	Alright.
	I'm told.
	So the judge literally sends her to bed.
	It's like, come back at 9.30.
	I want to talk to you right now.
	So then she comes back the next day, and she just, yes sir, no sir, for the entire last part of her question.
	Sensible, yeah.
	She's clearly got us thrown talking to.
	So if we can go to the next leg, which is just the third day.
	So this website I'm using as well, it's a guy who specializes in self-defense and the law around that, so he has a unique perspective on this.
	So then there's some other stuff that happened this day.
	So this is yesterday.
	There's more going on today, but this is as up-to-date as we can get, right?
	This day also didn't seem to go well for the idea that it was the cop's fault.
	It just made his case look better as well, which is why I'm sort of weirded out.
	Why is the prosecution letting this happen?
	It doesn't look good for their case at all because they're just laying out the facts of what went on.
	So they have a clerk who's at the store who took the fake $20 bill, knew it was fake, argued for Floyd, blah, blah, blah.
	They bring him on to give evidence about it.
	And again, it's mostly just the facts that everyone already knew.
	Except the two things he said that are of note is that when he saw George Floyd in the store, he was clearly high.
	So he's like, right, that doesn't bear well, but that was going to be said anyway.
	I've seen the video, just him stumbling around the erratic movements.
	He's off his head.
	Yeah, he is.
	He's not just, like, clearly high would be like someone with red eyes going, ha, ha, ha, ha, beavis and butter style.
	No, he's, like, you know, weaving around and, like, jumping up and down on the spot and, like, you know, acting very bizarrely.
	Yeah, but the clerk also mentions that the manager has a gun on him at all times and that the area is quite dangerous with his mother living upstairs in an apartment, so he clearly knows the area well.
	So again, this helps the police because they can say, well look, this area is extremely dangerous, therefore our ability to use force in this area should be taken into account.
	So, that doesn't go well.
	And then they have the bystanders, the guy most people know from the footage, shouting at George to just shut up and cooperate.
	Like the one saying, look, just get in the car, stop fussing.
	There's just this random guy who's just shouting at him.
	Some good advice, actually.
	Yeah, and in the court case, he seems to be the first guy as well who's a witness who doesn't seem to be slanted at all.
	He's just, this is my opinion.
	He believes that the cops are the ones who cause the death, and that's fine.
	That's his opinion.
	But I just want to commend him on actually being a reasonable person instead of an activist, like many of the other witnesses seem to be.
	But there is one mess-up.
	So the prosecution, wanting to get out of him that, oh, how horrible was all this, they ask him how did George Floyd look when he was restrained on the floor, expecting him to say, oh, it was terrible, you know, it looked like the man who was about to die or something like this.
	And instead he responds with, there was foam running out of his mouth and around his mouth.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	So that's an obvious sign that he's overdosing.
	The drugs in his system are doing their thing.
	And apparently we just got footage released of the police questioning him outside as well.
	And people noticed that before he's even taken to the car, the cops mention, why is there foam around your mouth?
	And then he's trying to explain it away.
	So that foam was from before he even got on the floor, which means it is from the drugs, almost certainly.
	So that also doesn't look good.
	I mean, from the security camera footage of George Floyd in the shop, I mean, he's almost falling over at some points.
	He's so obviously unbelievably stoned.
	It's not good.
	No, it's not good.
	And then if you've got foam before he's even put on the floor and then combine that with the body cam footage where he's like, you know, I can't breathe when he's just sat in the car and asked to be put on the floor.
	It's like, dude, you know, I don't want to be unsympathetic, but it really looks like he may have taken a lot of drugs here.
	Well, he did take a lot of attention.
	He took four times the death amount.
	The lethal amount, yeah.
	But everything seems to be coherent.
	Nothing is incongruent here.
	Everything seems to add up, and it seems that even if no police had turned up, George Floyd probably wouldn't have gone to a very good place.
	No.
	I mean, he already wasn't in a good place.
	I mean, when they arrested him as well, they pulled out a crack pipe.
	It was not going well for the lad.
	So that's the situation.
	And me looking at all of that, and then comparing that to what the media is reporting, which is that there seems to be solid evidence that it was definitely the cop that killed him.
	It's going bad for the cop.
	Yeah.
	I'm sorry, it's just not.
	Witness after witness.
	This looks terrible for the prosecution.
	More and more evidence from the witnesses saying that it probably was the drugs or the fact that the threat there seems to have added to the fact that the cops can say we used reasonable force given the threat that was posed to us.
	So, I don't know.
	I'm so sick of the media lying about this.
	So I thought I had to go through it because I hope this helps.
	I think it's valuable.
	I think it's interesting.
	I haven't been following it as closely as you've been following it.
	Because I've been doing other things.
	And yeah, I mean, I haven't watched any of the testimony.
	So it's interesting to see the distinction there, the difference, like between the person who's obviously very emotionally invested and ends up arguing with the court and getting sent home to go to bed and the guy who's just like, I just told you to get in the car because it was a good idea.
	And, you know, this is just my opinion.
	Yeah.
	I like how the prosecution as well having that bit uh-oh moment in which they're just like, yeah, tell us about how he was begging for his life.
	It was like, well, actually, there was just foam running in and out of his mouth.
	You can imagine the prosecution being like, No more questions, Your Honour.
	No more witnesses.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	Yeah, so moving on.
	Right, so yesterday we talked about the new race report that was released.
	We don't have any music, so I've got to do it myself.
	Is that the new jingle for the Race Report?
	That's the new jingle for the Race Report.
	Unfortunately, we have to talk about race a lot, because everyone in Britain is talking about race all the time.
	It seems to be the only thing that's ever on TV, actually.
	It's weird.
	I don't watch much TV, but I follow the BBC and LBC and all these things online, and all they do is put out clips that are just like, here's a race clip, here's a race clip, here's David Lammy talking about race, here's David Lammy claiming his English.
	Again, we're going to do a podcast on this later, because it's just ridiculous.
	But the whole thing has been amazing, right?
	So Rory did a dispatch on this for Logistics.com and just went through – it's a really, really good bit of reporting – and just goes through just some of the things that we found in there.
	And so basically, essentially, the result was the conclusion from the report, which was done by Dr.
	Tony Sewell, who is an Afro-Caribbean Windrush generation descendant himself, It says, Which is the forbidden words,
	by the way.
	We'll get to it in a bit.
	In this regard, we have pointed out how in education, employment, health and crime and policing, the UK can be a more inclusive and fairer landscape.
	So it's fine, but not perfect.
	The UK is basically the conclusion.
	The report also found that children from ethnic minority communities did better or as well as or better than white pupils in compulsory education, with black Caribbean pupils being the only group to perform less well.
	Success in education has transformed British society over 50 years into one offering far greater opportunities for all.
	The pay gap between all ethnic minorities, including black Caribbeans, and the white majority population had shrunk to 2.3% overall and was barely significant for employees under 30.
	So, I mean, if you're looking at this and going, yeah, but that 2% is the problem, that's not really the problem.
	And even then, you've got the racism of the gaps.
	Well, there's that 2% that must be racism.
	No, there are other factors that explain it, and it's because what you're doing is aggregating all ethnic minorities into one category, all white people into another category, and it's coming out almost the same, which frankly is bloody miraculous, to be honest.
	I can't believe that that's the case.
	But there we are.
	And diversity is, of course, increased everywhere, especially in important professions such as law and medicine.
	The report noted that some communities continue to be haunted by historic racism, but condemned the idealism of young people who claim the country is still institutionally racist.
	There is an increasingly strident form of anti-racist thinking that seeks to explain all minority disadvantage through the prism of white discrimination, diverting attention from other reasons for minority success and failure.
	And Tony Sewell went on BBC4. I stole this clip from Novara Media's coverage.
	Link in the show notes because, I mean, it's the most glorious hour of cope you've ever seen in your life.
	Because the best thing about it, you quite like Michael Walker, don't you?
	Yeah, I think he's all right.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And the funniest thing is he has to steel man the argument, and him just merely explaining what the opposition's argument is absolutely demolishes the response to it, and it's really funny.
	But we'll play this clip because he was on BBC4, and he just explains, look, the left is ridiculous in every way, shape, or form.
	And again, on Novara Media, them having to play this, it just looks embarrassing.
	They look dumb.
	But sorry, let's go on.
	We can chop this thing up into even finer distinctions and we have to be careful because, for example, the Commission found evidence that, in fact, in relation to sort of exclusions from schools, Black Caribbean pupils compared to black African pupils.
	There's a major difference.
	Black African pupils, their exclusion rate is less than half of black Caribbean pupils.
	The group at the moment in the country that's really doing well educationally Are West African students.
	They both sit in the same classrooms.
	They come from the same estates as the Caribbean pupils.
	Be clear what you think is the problem then.
	You're saying this is a cultural issue, that there are certain cultures, certain attitudes that make people perform less well.
	Yes, we're looking at it.
	This is the first report that looks at family strain.
	It looks at the pressures on families and the different ways in which ethnic minority groups respond to this.
	Socio-economic factors, geography.
	A Bangladeshi family, Bangladeshi girls are doing extremely well in London, not really doing very well in Bradford.
	We have to look at a historic mistrust.
	We have to look at my own community, Black Caribbean communities, and that historic mistrust around policing and how that's been a burden for us to really move on.
	So, I mean...
	That's amazing.
	...BTFO'd.
	The liberals were right all along.
	The communists have always been wrong.
	I mean, just imagine it.
	You've got a black Caribbean man talking about classrooms full of black kids from different areas of the world, and some of the black kids are doing very well, some of the black kids are not doing very well, and the guy's like, so, are you saying it's cultural differences?
	Yes!
	You know, it's like, God, yes, what else could it be?
	Like...
	It can't be the way the system's treating them because they're all black, says the black man.
	Yeah, that's the point we made previously with, like, the difference between Indians and Pakistanis in the UK. Indians excel at pretty much every status you can.
	Bangladeshis.
	Bangladeshi girls in Bradford doing really poorly.
	Bangladeshi girls in London doing really well.
	Dunno, must be the racism.
	But it's the point of, like, you ask the white supremacy here, they can't tell the difference between black African, black Caribbean, or, like, Pakistani and Indian.
	Like, I'm sorry, but no one's that, you know, no one's got, like, magnifying glasses out to test the melanin levels.
	But the thing is, I kind of feel sorry for the West Africans, who must be sitting there going, you're making us look bad.
	No, I don't feel sorry for them at all.
	No, because they're working really hard.
	The West African kids who are working really hard, and they're like, look, I'm succeeding.
	The Caribbeans are just like, no, no, no, you're being oppressed by racism.
	They're like, shut up.
	I'm trying to get my degree or whatever.
	Just shut up.
	You're making us look bad.
	I thought you were talking about the Caribbeans.
	I feel sorry for them.
	They're probably going, shut up, you're making us look bad.
	Stop succeeding.
	God, it's really undermining our argument.
	Salary go burr.
	My duty at number one.
	But if anyone has ever met people from Africa, which I've met many, I've worked with many in my time.
	Don't take no S. They're very socially conservative and they don't take excuses.
	And that's to their credit, you know, entirely to their credit.
	And so, well, you know, just get a job, stop complaining, do this, do that.
	And it's like, okay, I better do it.
	You tried not breaking the law.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Just very, very straightforward and clearly driven to succeed, which is fantastic.
	And there are loads of other small cultural things as well.
	Again, the Africans don't seem to have this view of persistent oppression that the Caribbeans seem to have.
	It's because they were doing it as well.
	Well, the Kemi Badendock response, yeah.
	I know we covered previously, the people who were left in West Africa were the ones selling the black slaves.
	So the blacks you end up with in Caribea are sort of the descendants of the ones who are enslaved by the blacks who are in West Africa.
	Yes.
	And so, like, they don't have the same attitude.
	And this attitude has manifestly different results.
	And this appears to be, as Sewell says, about cultural expectations.
	And, of course, the left...
	has freaked out about this.
	They are not happy in any way, shape, or form, and The Guardian has been having an absolute meltdown.
	All of the opinion pieces The Guardian has published in the last 24 hours have been about this report, from presumably Caribbean-descended people saying, wait a minute, I really don't like this.
	This one is from Kalwant Bhopal, who...
	she thinks this is nonsense.
	She says, Tony Sewell, she starts attacking him, right?
	Has in the past openly questioned the existence of institutional and structural racism.
	Well, what?
	He didn't assume your conclusion?
	Mad.
	I can't believe it.
	He didn't already come to the conclusion you had based your entire activism around.
	Incredible.
	Now the commission's first report has been published, it's even clearer that the purpose was to whitewash the problem of racism in Britain.
	Why would this black guy want to whitewash the problem of racism in Britain?
	Why would he want that?
	What a complaint as well.
	It's like, you didn't just assume everyone's a heretic?
	Yeah.
	Like, this inquisitor is like, well, maybe not everyone's a heretic?
	Yeah.
	How dare you?
	It's almost like this inquisitor isn't even committed to the Catholic Church.
	But anyway, she says, you know, the 264-page report argues that the UK has become a more open society in which issues of race and racism are becoming less important for explaining the persistent inequalities.
	That's only because that's what the data shows.
	According to its authors, the report findings challenge the view that Britain has failed to make progress in tackling racial inequality and suggest that the well-meaning idealism of many young people who claim the country is still institutionally racist is not borne out by the evidence.
	Yeah, but it's not.
	There's no difference between young people when it comes to race.
	And the older ones, it's 2.3%.
	The evidence suggests that the evidence shows that there's nothing wrong.
	It's like, yep.
	That's true.
	But we're going to get more into this because it gets even better as we go through more of their, I mean, I don't know what we call them, character witnesses for racism?
	Anyway, she says black Caribbean pupils are five times more likely to be excluded in some areas of England compared with other groups.
	Yeah, the other groups being black Africans.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah, they are.
	Yeah, they are.
	That's true.
	And so the question doesn't seem to be one about skin colour.
	It seems to be one about culture.
	The teachers consistently fail to address the overt racism that many black pupils experience in schools.
	Yeah, but is that from the West African students or something?
	Like, what...
	Anyway, last week it was reported that more than 60,000 incidents of racism were recorded over the last five years in UK schools.
	Okay, but why aren't they holding back the West African kids?
	Why are they having no problem with this?
	Once socioeconomic status is, quote, controlled for...
	Oh, now we're undermining the very scientific method.
	The authors write, all major ethnic groups perform better than white British pupils except Black Caribbean.
	Yet, while statistics such as these can be useful for mapping broad trends, they are far from perfect.
	So now we're going to say, right, scientific method.
	No, no, no.
	Everything you've done, totally undermined.
	These statistics are shaped by assumptions, theories, and interests of the authors.
	Okay, but the author was black.
	Like, you can't be like, yeah, this white guy did it.
	And so his white bias was preventing him from seeing how his bias was shaping his assumptions.
	You want to restimate their power.
	The black man is a white man, don't you know?
	David Lammy thesis.
	They aren't neutral and can introduce unintended biases.
	Again, what could they be?
	Attempting to control, again, as if the idea of controlling in studies is some, like, fringe theory that nobody's ever heard of before.
	For different factors based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how racism works.
	Okay, now we've got the magical theory of racism.
	Often, various statistical factors such as people's socioeconomic status or geographic location are themselves the product of racism.
	So, racism made Bangladeshi girls in London more popular and successful than Bangladeshi girls in Bradford.
	Racism chose to make London Bangladeshi girls successful.
	Why?
	Why would it do this?
	How do you explain this?
	What would be the point?
	Why wouldn't it advantage the white British majority?
	You've got to stand the white supremacy.
	It's always playing for me chess with your mind.
	I'm the only one who understands this.
	Donald Trump is funding migrants to catch the USA to undermine it, to make an argument.
	How?
	How would it do this?
	Why are the West Africans doing so well?
	For example, if a survey into educational attainment controlled for poverty, it might look, on paper at least, as if racism played a less significant role.
	That's a very good point.
	It would look on paper.
	And in reality.
	But this ignores the reality that poverty is often inherently related to racism and is disproportionately experienced in the UK by ethnic minorities.
	Except it's like 60% of white British are working class and therefore they are at the same position.
	So how does that work?
	But anyway, the claim that white working class children are more deprived than those from other ethnic minority groups has often been repeated.
	But the research used to support this idea is often based on a small number of white families defined by poverty measures such as their entitlement to free school meals.
	So as in they surveyed them.
	So now surveys are off the table.
	Surveys don't work because there's only a small minority.
	I mean, the survey of the black people is also a small minority, but we'll ignore that.
	Only surveys that go against the narrative, comrade.
	Yeah.
	Such claims often feel dangerously misleading ideas about the white working class failure.
	Before the pandemic, around 12% of white children claimed free school meals, but around 60% of white people consider themselves working class.
	The label working class is so nebulous that it is easily misused to give a wholly false picture of the white children as race victims.
	Yet academically, they are almost at the very bottom of the pile, in a majority white country.
	Why is that the case?
	I mean, there could be other reasons that they don't claim free school meals, such as pride.
	You know, there is actually like a deeply ingrained, you shouldn't be taking free stuff because that makes you a leech sort of attitude among the white working class.
	I know because I grew up with it.
	You know, you don't want to, you know, it's about dignity.
	It speaks more to the author here.
	It speaks way more to the author and her opinion, low opinion, of the ethnic minority communities.
	But apparently now, it doesn't matter that the white working class are earning less than the ethnic minorities, or the same as overall, and it doesn't matter the fact the ethnic minority is doing better in schools, and obviously that gives them better working opportunities later on.
	No, now the white working class are actually the oppressors.
	The government must move away from perpetuating a hierarchy of oppression that promotes the idea of white victimhood and discounts race inequity as a lesser problem.
	But there is no inequity.
	It's 2.3%.
	And that's in the older generations.
	It's 2.3%.
	We're not even looking for different treatment now.
	We're looking for inequities.
	And even then, you run out of argument.
	And we're not even finding racism.
	It's iniquities between the West Africans and the Black Caribbeans, and they both look exactly the same.
	Because they're actually, genetically, both from exactly the same fucking region.
	They're the same people!
	Like, I don't know what to tell you.
	But anyway, she comes to the conclusion of her amazing thesis here, right?
	The result of refusing to acknowledge institutional racism is that the government will refuse to act upon it.
	Instead, black and minority ethnic children will be blamed for their failings.
	Yes.
	If they fail, the failure is on them.
	They should be blamed for their own failings.
	Because their failings are not someone else's failings.
	Like, why would you ever commit that to paper or to digital paper?
	If we accept this report, then people are going to be held accountable for what they do!
	Yeah, exactly!
	The Caribbean community is going to be held accountable for the things they did in the way that the West African community is being held accountable for the things they did.
	Based on success.
	Like, they get rewards.
	Exactly!
	Right, okay?
	Amazing.
	And so the next one from the Guardian, again, I'm sorry to just give you a bunch of Guardian texts, but these are all just gold, right?
	Despite the Sewell report, number 10 can no longer remain in denial about racism.
	What?
	Right, so Simon's just going to ignore that report.
	So despite finding no racism, racism.
	It begins, Let's remember why this commission came about.
	Last summer, as COVID-19 struck our nation in an unprecedented tragic way, it became clear it was having a disproportionate and devastating impact on African, Asian, Caribbean, and other racial minority communities.
	Didn't this come about because of George Floyd?
	This report, yeah.
	So in response to the Black Lives Matter protest, Horace was like, Okay, I'll issue a committee to set up a report in response to how racist Britain is.
	And the response was, Nah.
	But this guy said, no, it's actually because of COVID killing more, like, black Africans or something.
	I suppose you could argue it's a list of, you know, grievances.
	I mean, in the report itself, they say, the nationwide BLM marches last year were catalyzed by the shocking case of police brutality in the USA, resulted in the death of George Floyd.
	Many young British citizens felt compelled to protest and call for change here too.
	As in, they cite George Floyd's death as being the catalyst for this.
	So why would you say, oh, it's COVID that caused this?
	And even then, why would you start claiming that COVID's racist?
	Anyway, the report has almost no answers to the plethora of inequalities that COVID has uncovered.
	In education, health, housing and employment.
	To have published it at any time in the last 20 years would be seen as a whitewash.
	To do so in the months of heartache and awareness raising in the past year is almost criminally negligent.
	It would hear about the lived experience of young black people being nine times more likely to be stopped and searched and twice as likely to lose their jobs during a pandemic.
	So, wait.
	Are we saying that lockdowns are racist?
	Because, I mean, I'm happy to portray lockdowns as being racist if it means we can end those bloody lockdowns.
	I'll pay the price.
	I'll pay the price.
	No, no, that's great.
	Lockdowns are bad.
	Bad things are racist.
	Lockdowns are racist.
	Checkmate.
	Anyway, there's not much good I can see in this report, except for what many minority ethnic parents already know, that the pursuit of education is our best opportunity out of poverty.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, that's right.
	You know what this reminds me of?
	You remember we did that story on the, what was it, like, Hussein or whatever?
	Combine that with the previous one, black and minority ethnic children we blame for their failures, and you look at the black Caribbean community's educational attainment rates, which are lower than the white working classes, then yeah, it's because they're not staying in school.
	That's it.
	You've got it.
	You've hit on it.
	You've...
	Done it.
	Guardian.
	You've achieved reality.
	You've got to that point.
	Sorry, go on.
	No, don't worry.
	But it's funny that they've got to the point of just like, stay in school, kids.
	Like, okay.
	Just took you, what, 20 years?
	30 years?
	Didn't take the West Africans any time at all.
	And look how well they're doing.
	Yeah.
	Anyway.
	The point is, yeah, it's about education.
	That's really the best way out of poverty.
	But this is clearly not enough in and of itself, though, because discrimination has been shown to be an issue even for those who are highly educated.
	Oh, the poor oppressed Oxbridge students.
	If only they could catch a break, man.
	Britain is changing.
	We must seize the opportunity to be a dynamic multicultural nation.
	Dude, Britain's changed.
	It's already here, and it turns out that there's very, very little in the way of ethnic difference and discrimination that can be actually identified from the science of it.
	I guess you've just got your mythical narrative.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	And this next one is basically a series of character witnesses against the racism of Britain that essentially say that this report was an insult.
	A blasphemy, if you will.
	Halima Begum You can't tell me that racism of God doesn't exist.
	It's just literally her position.
	Never mind the CEO of racism, the god of racism.
	There's literally negligible difference between under-30s when it comes to ethnicity, and she's like, yeah, well, that's not proof that there's not institutional racism.
	God, a racism still exists.
	What would you want?
	If that's not proof, what does proof look like?
	Well, at least 2.3% between adults.
	Oh, God.
	We see young black men far more likely to be stopped and searched by the Metropolitan Police and twice as likely to die in custody.
	Yeah, but isn't that Sadiq Khan's problem?
	British Pakistanis are paid 15% less than their white British peers.
	How can we forget the entire Windrush generation who had degraded, denied hospital treatment and benefits?
	Hang on, hang on.
	British Pakistanis are paid 15% less than white British peers.
	How much are they paid less than their Indian peers?
	50?
	70?
	Or what about any East Asians and things like this?
	I mean...
	Right, moving on!
	If the Prime Minister and Tony Sewell genuinely believe in their whitewash of a report...
	Then perhaps they could sit down and explain their point of view to the black women who are four times more likely to die in childbirth than white mothers-to-be, or the NHS healthcare workers from consultants to hospital porters who are much more likely to die during the pandemic.
	So, explain to them how COVID is racist, or how the NHS is racist.
	I mean, I don't...
	I mean, I'm...
	I mean, there's literally a BBC documentary about this that we did a whole episode on.
	We did.
	And it's just not.
	It's not.
	But anyone who wants to abolish the NHS, calling it racist is a good way to go.
	Like, if we're abolishing things that are racist, then lockdowns in the NHS are on the chopping block.
	Not good news for leftists, but, I mean, you know, not my problem.
	It is inequality that makes these people vulnerable.
	But there isn't very much inequality at all.
	Structural, institutional, entrenched racial inequality that you can't demonstrate.
	Sewell ascribes...
	Hang on, just how that's written?
	What even is that?
	That sentence is just...
	Rhetoric.
	Just structural, institutional, entrenched racial inequality.
	I mean, it just reads like party propaganda.
	It is.
	It doesn't even read well.
	It is party propaganda.
	Because as soon as you apply that statement to, I don't know, a London school, we've got...
	Caribbean and West African kids.
	Again, both of the same genetic stock, who both are in the same country, in the same school, and get different levels of educational attainment.
	I mean...
	What is the structural inequality?
	What is the institutional inequality?
	And what is the racial inequality?
	There's nothing.
	It's just rhetoric.
	It's equivalence to a religious statement.
	I know we're going on, but there's just so much of this that is just...
	Oh, it's nonsense.
	But anyway, we'll go on next to the next one.
	It was a wonderful, wonderful input by someone called Sam Fan.
	If we can scroll down a little bit so you can see a picture of him.
	Sorry, boy.
	Most importantly, I think they're probably slightly behind the Indians when it comes to earnings.
	Are Asians not?
	East Asians?
	East Asians?
	Yes.
	What do you mean by East Asians?
	Well, people from the Orient.
	Which part of it?
	Well, I don't know.
	Because again, this gets more and more complex.
	Sure, but...
	The Chinese, for example, are just under the Indians.
	Well, I mean, he points out Chinese people in his little diatribe, so I'm going to assume he's Chinese.
	But the point is, he says, well-worn tropes about East Asian success downplay the discrimination we face.
	What tropes?
	The data is there, mate!
	But that's the point.
	He literally says, for my entire life, my ethnic group has been labelled successful, even a model minority.
	No, that's what the Americans call you.
	Yet this idea only serves to downplay the very real discrimination and racism East Asians face.
	According to the report, institutional racism isn't a problem.
	Chinese people, along with black, Afghan, Bangladeshi and Indian people, experience a high level of educational success.
	Then what are you whining about?
	We'll do a stupid argument as well.
	Like, we might be rich, but we still get racism against us.
	Hang on, hang on.
	It's that argument, though, of, like, would you rather be a rich black man or a poor white man?
	Yeah.
	Rich black man every day.
	Obviously.
	The report further states that Indian and Chinese ethnic groups comfortably outperform the white average in education and income and seem to benefit from positive stereotypes.
	Oh, dear.
	I'm so sorry that racism is doing this to you.
	I wish.
	Like, we all look up to you, how terrible that must be.
	I wish that we were all as wealthy and discriminated against as you are, Mr.
	Fan.
	But, yeah, so furthermore, they encourage the idea that the issues of racism and discrimination are not institutional problems, but rather a question of individual behavior that can easily be overcome by studying and working hard.
	You know, like the Asians did.
	He doesn't say that, but that's what he means, because that's what's in there.
	John's like, shame to family.
	But I mean, you're not wrong, are you, John?
	I mean, this guy is an embarrassment.
	Yeah, but there's the thing, I'm so successful, it's racism.
	Anyway, we'll continue on because we're running out of time.
	Let's play the next clip of Kehinde Andrews reacting to this, because you can imagine just how Kehinde Andrews treated this.
	And so what that has happened is there is slightly more representation in some of the industries.
	There is slightly more representation of people able to write reports and be in the government.
	But unfortunately, that is not actually a good measure of how far we've come.
	And if you look at the overall picture of race, it's still just as bad as it has ever been.
	So no, there is no real progress.
	There's just a bit of diversity.
	But diversity does not lead to progress, as hopefully this government and this report shows us.
	So diversity doesn't lead to progress.
	So all of that advocacy for diversity meant nothing!
	It achieved nothing!
	Kehinde Andrews, I've wasted my life.
	Yeah, exactly!
	Just put a gun in his mouth, like, turns out diversity wasn't the proper solution!
	Diversity isn't our strength!
	Turns out all these institutions are now being run by people of colour and the white supremacy still persists.
	It's ridiculous.
	It's ridiculous.
	I mean, the Independent...
	Having brown-skinned people in government didn't make it turn to communism.
	I'm sorry, Kehinde.
	But I just love the way he says it.
	It's like diversity isn't progress.
	Okay, then we can stop with all the diversity waffling, can't we?
	Enough.
	No, it doesn't.
	Candy Andrews, diversity doesn't need to progress.
	Right, stop.
	Just stop.
	It doesn't cure racial inequalities.
	Gotcha.
	Anyway, the Independent, at the time when I had put this together, they had only put out one article about this, and this article was two paragraphs and one sentence long.
	They were really not happy about this, right?
	They just call it gaslighting.
	Disparities in exercise and gaslighting.
	At best, the report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities is a well-intentioned but self-satisfied, complacent, and preordained, as if their position isn't preordained, right?
	At worst, it's a deliberate and cynical exercise in what we have now come to call gaslighting.
	Born out of a need-to-say-or-do-something, anything, to respond to the Black Lives Matter protests of last year, you know, the things that are complaining about things that happened in a different country.
	The explosion of pent-up frustration towards the racial injustices that still permeate British society, which we can't seem to point out, has ended up in Soto Voce concluding that it is white working-class lives as much as anyone's that are being undervalued and blighted by inequalities.
	That's only because that's what the data says.
	Well, I'm sorry to tell you.
	Every ethnic group other than Black Caribbean is doing better than the white majority, and you're like, yeah, but racism.
	If you didn't want the white majority to look like the victims of affirmative action, then you shouldn't have made them commission this goddamn report.
	You shouldn't have been going on about how you're the victims of the privileges you've been given.
	You shouldn't have kept putting in barriers in place to stop them succeeding, such as denying jobs in the government and in the private sector on the basis of their skin tone.
	I mean, you guys did this for the last 20 years.
	But this is the best part about all of this.
	Quote, the whole BLM phenomenon we are invited to believe was based on a misreading of survey statistics.
	Yes.
	Yes, that's actually correct.
	That is the exact point that you have arrived at.
	It is you not representing reality accurately.
	That's what it is.
	Anyway, the best take on this was, of course, from BLM radical Sasha Johnson, who said that these house Negroes need hanging, quote...
	Disavow, obviously.
	It's like, what was the committee?
	I think it was like nine people who weren't white and then one person who was white on the committee.
	And they issue a report saying, we can't find any evidence of racism.
	And she's just like, turns around, hang the end.
	Hang the house negro.
	It's like, oh my god.
	Jesus, man.
	Like, she's literally like, lynched the brown people.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, she's got...
	Hashtag BLM. If it helps, she provides a reason.
	Right?
	She posted on Instagram saying a picture of the Guardian article, one of them, and said, these are the kinds of house Negroes that they send to take down the movement.
	I won't stop calling them out until they have no place in our community, let alone speaking on behalf of us.
	Say what you want about me.
	The facts is blah, blah.
	And she responds to someone saying, who says we have them in America as well.
	And she says they need hanging.
	It's like, wow.
	I mean, I guess that it will bring down your movement that white supremacy is oppressing you if it factually turns out that white supremacy is not oppressing you.
	I did send her a message on Instagram saying we'd like to interview her.
	I don't think she's going to accept.
	But Sasha, if you're up for a chat, I'd love to have a conversation about this.
	Anyway, we don't really have time to do the third segment now, do we?
	I can save it for tomorrow.
	Yeah, okay, we'll save it for tomorrow.
	Tune in tomorrow, we're going to talk about some child soldiers that are being radicalised by the Socialist Workers' Party in London.
	On the basis of race.
	We don't have any April 1st stories.
	There are no April 1st stories.
	No, these are all real.
	The Socialist Workers' Party in London are basically recruiting child soldiers at a school.
	As you do.
	I'll save it for tomorrow.
	Right, I guess we'll go for the video comments.
	So we have a lovely white pill this morning with this new report on racial disparities, saying that the UK is a model for other white majority countries and that we're not institutionally racist.
	So I think it's about time that we started flying our flag with a bit more pride and stop worrying about what people want to call us because they think we're racists.
	Bunch of idiots.
	Jonathan is right.
	The left is in total retreat over this.
	This report is essentially completely routing them because it's the most detailed report they've done.
	I haven't even finished reading it yet, but they go over the previous reports like the Lammy report and the various other ones that condemn the UK for being a horribly racist place because they presuppose the...
	The presence of racism in every structure around them.
	But none of the information or the data that we have indicates that, and if anything, it indicates that it's structurally disadvantaging white people.
	Anyway, let's get to the next one.
	So, having watched Sargon of Akkad in 2017, at the age of 17, I was basically cured of all of the vestiges of feminism that were left within me.
	But it's my theory that a lot of women can't cure themselves because on average we're not necessarily the most practically minded and so we don't see how feminist policies will play out in the real world.
	Thoughts?
	It could be that that's the case.
	I don't dare make any kind of sweeping assumptions in that way, but it could be that that's the case.
	I think it's also the case that there are lots of left-wing activists in the same way that the Black Lives Matter movement has essentially taken advantage of the good intentions and well-meaning attitudes of Black Lives Matter.
	Young black people and other ethnic minorities.
	I think the feminist movement has done the same with women.
	And again, if you just look at, say, the number of the male-to-female ratio in universities, you find there's about 60-40 or something like that these days.
	So it's like, right, okay, if there is oppression, show it, you know, demonstrate it.
	And if we can't demonstrate it, then why are we presupposing it?
	Let's go for the next one.
	Hi, guys.
	Serious question for all serious tacticians out there.
	In a battle between Nurgle and the Horned Rat, who is the dirtiest boy?
	I don't play Warhammer Fancy.
	I play Warhammer 40,000.
	So I'm going to default to Nurgle in this, presumably making the Skaven, I don't know, like, second best.
	But I mean, I don't know.
	I don't play Warhammer Fancy.
	Yeah, I don't know anything about the rat either.
	Yeah, no.
	But, you know, no one's going to diss Papa Nurgle on my watch.
	I used to have a Nurgle Chaos Army when I was a kid.
	It was awesome.
	Toughness 5.
	Get wrecked.
	Let's go for the next one.
	If David Lamy is African...
	Doesn't he owe reparations to those that were sold into slavery?
	Well, you'll find out all about that when we do our podcast on David Lammy's heritage.
	Next one.
	Hello.
	I've recently found out that I am a trans race man.
	I am truly inside black, a proud black African man.
	So I've decided as to become outside of what I am inside, I'm going to become a coal miner.
	I don't know how familiar you are with the third parties we have here in America, but recently the Libertarian Party, the branch in Kentucky, tweeted out about the COVID passports.
	Oh, will they be gold stars that go on our armbands?
	And this caused a lot of pearl-clutching fake outrage about, oh my god, how dare you compare anything to the Nazis?
	But considering recently that Trudeau, up in Canada, Tweeted out about how if you traveled and then come back and you get a positive COVID test You have to go to our government facilities designated for this It seems to me that comparisons to the Holocaust are less and less hyperbolic every day This is getting very scary what they're trying to do with all the COVID crap Yeah,
	I'm not suggesting there is any kind of connection between the COVID passports and Nazism.
	But it's definitely got a kind of unpleasant taste in the mouth, hasn't it?
	Why would you want to...
	I mean, this is one of the reasons that the government in this country has been like, I don't think we can do that.
	Because it's got this kind of really discriminatory aspect to it.
	And it's not in and of itself the end of the world.
	But it starts leading you down a path that justifies worse and worse things, and it'd be better to just walk somewhere else.
	So, anyway, let's go to the next one.
	Hi, guys.
	We need some white pills, like Joe Biden in 2019 saying that he was going to cure cancer.
	I wonder how long it will take him.
	But basically my question is, in general, are you more black-pilled or more white-pilled about the situation facing the West?
	I know the other day, Carol, you were fairly black-pilled.
	Callum, you seemed fairly white-pilled in comparison.
	But, yeah.
	Are you more optimistic or pessimistic about the situation?
	Thanks, guys.
	Go on then, Callum.
	You optimistic?
	Optimistic about what?
	I suppose that's the question.
	Good point.
	The survival of Western civilisation?
	Um...
	I mean, it's going to totter on, whether you like it or not.
	Depending on whether or not it'll be liberal or it'll be progressive hellhole, you know?
	I think it can be saved.
	How?
	We need Trumps in government.
	I mean, Trump's four years in government, for example.
	No one can say that that did nothing.
	That was not a momentary pushback.
	Well, you need that.
	You need more of that.
	We need more Donald Trumps.
	Yeah.
	You listening, Boris?
	It's your destiny.
	Anyway, St.
	Floyd, Jordan Chandler says, Hi guys, there's recently been all sorts of threats on Twitter from BLM to burn down Minnesota if Chauvin is found not guilty.
	What a shock.
	My question is...
	I thought it was a movement of peace.
	Yeah, how is this not biasing the jury in grounds for a mistrial?
	If I'm a juror and I'm being compelled to find a certain way by a threat of the destruction of the property of my area, how can I be expected to give a fair and impartial answer?
	I think you already know the answer to that.
	The answer is you can't.
	Well, the jury are instructed to keep away from all social media or media, aren't they?
	Yeah, they're sequestered, yeah.
	But, I mean, at the end of the day, when the flames start creeping in, I'm like, right, okay.
	If they start burning stuff down before the court trials ended, then yeah, I can see a good problem.
	I mean, how long is it going to go on for?
	I don't know.
	It's going to be a few weeks, isn't it?
	So, I mean, it could well be that in like a week's time they will be trying to.
	Doug says, hey guys, I don't know if you heard, but an activist just got caught in the Chauvin trial attempting to take photos of the jurors.
	Yes, I did see this.
	Some idiot on Twitter who's verified.
	It was like, how are you this stupid?
	She was like, oh, I had no idea.
	I was like, no, no, son off.
	And the thing is, Arch sent me a New York Times article where they're talking about the bunch of the jurors.
	They don't name them, but it's like one of those things.
	It's like, why are they giving out loads of information about the jurors?
	Because it's the sort of thing you could, you know, triangulate using various social media accounts to identify who those people are.
	Any data Alanis will tell you they only need like three or four things about you to figure out who you are.
	And in fact, he says the New York Times also partially docks the jurors by releasing intimate details of each juror.
	Yeah, it seems like there is an attempt to bias the trial by the media, and of course by the activists, and it's because I think they know that George Floyd, especially given all of the video evidence we have, seems to have been on his way.
	Mr.
	Wint says, Will any commentator have the stomachs call Chauvin a hero in order to point out the media's rage for meme words and silence for the death and devastation that will follow any outcome from the trial slash witch hunt?
	Of course, Chauvin isn't a hero, but with the utter lack of nuance in the media, triggering seems to be any remedy.
	To be honest with you, I think this is one of those cases where we should just not take a side.
	I mean, if they could provide scientific evidence that showed that George Floyd had neck damage, he had bruising or whatever, and that Chauvin had actually done something to interfere with his breathing, then fine.
	You know, Chauvin killed him, sent him to jail.
	Black Lives Matter were right about Derek Chauvin.
	Yeah.
	However, it doesn't look like they're going to be able to provide that evidence, because otherwise, why wouldn't that have been day one of the trial?
	And so it looks like it's going to be the darkest timeline outcome.
	And the thing is, this still doesn't make Chauvin a hero.
	And I don't want to be clipped to saying that he is, because I don't think he is.
	I just think he's a regular guy.
	He seems to be a normal cop, just doing his job, as he was trained to do.
	So I don't want to call him a hero for that.
	And I don't want to get hyperbolic because I think the best option we can have is just try and talk people down.
	Anyway, Solomon says, not a legal or medical expert, but saliva-covered pills in the car, four times the lethal limit of drugs, and the nine-minute time frame.
	I'm just going to guess Floyd panic-swallowed his entire stash when he spotted the cops nearby.
	That is an inferentially strong assumption.
	Drugs needed a couple of minutes to dissolve and promptly stopped his heart.
	By all counts, he probably would have died even if the cops had used an opioid antagonist like a nalaxone auto-injector.
	I don't know anything about that, but I think it is a fair inference to suggest that Floyd kind of panicked when the cops turned up and may well have tried to eat in his stash.
	Not wise.
	I still can't get over the prosecution trying to defend that.
	They were like, no, no, no, George Floyd takes fentanyl for breakfast.
	He'll live through it.
	What a weird defense.
	It's enough fentanyl to kill a horse.
	But he takes fentanyl all the time.
	He'll have a high tolerance.
	I'm like, sure that's true, but I'm also sure that you can't take that much and have no effect.
	Chris says, The MMA guy has been videoed participating in smashing police cars in
	the riots, says Alistair Crowley.
	Yeah, I saw that going around, in fact.
	I didn't know anything about that.
	Oh, I watched, he was giving a speech as well, like yelling Black Lives Matter stuff about how cops are evil.
	He's being oppressed.
	Atara, the lady, hey Atara, says Floyd wouldn't have died if the cops hadn't showed up because he shoved more pills in his mouth right before they pulled up so the cops wouldn't find them.
	That's entirely possible.
	We can't confirm that, but I think that's, again, an inferentially strong statement.
	I think it's probably likely that that would have been the case.
	Student of History says, So I'm going to 100% this trial is a farce.
	Journalism and witness PR have already ruined it by semi-doxing the jurors.
	Yes.
	David says, If the narrative don't fit, you must acquit.
	Chris says, The prosecution kept showing footage of George's erratic behavior before in the store hand.
	You'd be forgiven for thinking this was the defense's argument.
	Brad P says, The media was working overtime to fortify the Chauvin trial.
	Yes, they were.
	Legal lisenskism.
	The wider gap between the reporting and reality, the more destruction when reality exerts itself.
	Stay safe, fellow burger enthusiasts.
	Yes.
	And if anyone's listening from Minnesota, it might be worth taking a holiday or something.
	You know, assuming you're allowed.
	I mean, honestly, that's what I'd do.
	Yeah, I would.
	I would go visit some friends or family somewhere else.
	If possible.
	Anyway, when it comes to the racism aspect, Mike Cox-Long, do you feel a degree of...
	It's a good surname.
	Do you feel a degree of sympathy for BAME people of people of colour?
	As I was thinking last night, if I get spoon-fed by every news source constantly for so long that your white countrymen hate you, I may also believe so.
	Believe a life so long that it becomes true.
	I hope that makes sense.
	Orcs2021.
	He's not wrong.
	No, I posted something on my Facebook page yesterday, in fact.
	community for the media doing this to them because I do think that a large part of it is the fact that all they see in the media every single day is black people suffering white people doing it it's like well what impression are you gonna come away with and it's not that black people have a particularly hard time in Britain or anything like that it's that the media is just doing everything they can to persuade them they do Heathcliff says last night on the BBC a non-white journalist talks to a non-white news anchor a non-white commission leader and a non-white MP about how non-whites can't succeed in the UK a segment Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	A segment so utterly ridiculous.
	It must have red-pilled some normies, surely.
	uh maybe uh tf allspark load seats is 101 how dadism and keto can destroy communism a book by carl benjamin where's my reparations david lammy yeah we'll be doing that in a bit uh i I will get my reparations from David Lammy.
	He owes me.
	The English colonized the earth, David.
	I'm a victim of that.
	Where's my money?
	Henry Ashman says, I wonder if David Lammy is a bit like Andy Murray, who's British when he wins and Scottish when he loses.
	Lammy is only British when it's a good thing for him.
	Do we have a term for this, like bandwagon Brits or Schrodinger's Brit?
	Bandwagon Brits is pretty good, but it's English.
	The term English really is the most important, because the term British does apply to a very, very broad spectrum of people, but English doesn't.
	It applies to quite a narrow spectrum of people, which is interesting why David Lammy is trying to colonise it, as it were, because ordinarily David Lammy probably would have been like, well, he probably would have agreed with Monroe Bergdorf on the English.
	So, hmm.
	Sorry, I'm making a meme while we're talking.
	Okay.
	I wonder what I was doing.
	Yeah.
	I'm trying to make the money printer meme of the African, the Caribbean African.
	Education goes brr.
	Yeah.
	Francesca Ward says, I'm legally blind and managed in mainstream education even though there wasn't really much provision for me.
	If I can succeed, why can't Africans?
	Their culture is more of a disability than my spazzy optic nerves.
	No, no, Francesca, Africans are doing great.
	It's the Caribbeans that aren't doing great even though they come from exactly the same stock.
	So there must be something cultural because, It can't be genetic.
	The genetic differences are literally next to nothing.
	What do you mean next to nothing?
	They're not nothing.
	Well, they'll be interbreeding with some whites or something like that.
	Oh, right.
	Okay.
	The Caribbean's a large place.
	The Caribbean's being held back by the white inbreeding?
	I suppose so.
	The white interbreeding?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	How did the white supremacy...
	The white supremacy.
	4D chess again.
	We enslaved you just to have sex with you so then we could keep you down with your genetic differences.
	By making...
	Oh, my God.
	God, none of it makes sense!
	Watching the left go into a meltdown of the accusation that there is more than one culture amongst blacks is priceless.
	Yeah, I know, it's amazing, isn't it?
	What do you mean every black person isn't African-American?
	They all look the same!
	Sorry to disappoint you leftists, but the West Africans are not having any of this.
	I love the left has come to the conclusion, yeah, but they all look the same, therefore.
	It's just amazing.
	I mean, Christopher Hitchens had this great point where he's like, look, right?
	The problem isn't discrimination.
	The problem is a lack of discrimination.
	By saying, look, all these people are the same colour and you're not discriminating against them, you need discrimination in order to not be racist.
	As in, not all the blacks are the same, so treat them appropriately, you know.
	You should discriminate amongst the blacks.
	Yes, you should.
	Amongst the whites.
	Yeah, and as soon as a black guy does that, the left are like, gaslighting.
	There's a black guy doing it.
	What are you complaining about?
	Anyway, Paul Watts...
	Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that Keir Starmer, as he says, is disappointed by the findings of race and ethnicity's disparity reports.
	He's disappointed that the country is not racist.
	Weird flex, but okay.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Sir Keir Starmer, possibly the whitest white man in all of white land.
	And he's like, wow, I can't believe this country isn't racist.
	It's like the stormtroopers on Twitter must have been going, yeah, exactly.
	Labor's doing its best, though.
	Jordan Chandler, now that we have an official report BTFOing the concept of institutional racism, can we now accurately term it a conspiracy theory like QAnon?
	That's a good point.
	Institutional racism is a conspiracy theory.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's literally a blue-anon issue, you know?
	It literally is a conspiracy theory.
	And I think we should, in fact, spend our time.
	When they say institutional racism, we say, okay, conspiracy theorist, where's your evidence?
	And they go, well, I don't have any.
	Blacks are actually doing better, apart from the Caribbeans.
	And so are all the other athlete groups.
	White supremacy.
	Matt M. West Africans.
	White!
	Welcome, most Africans!
	I told you!
	I told you!
	In two weeks, the African nation will become part of the white super state.
	So now we've got all of Asia, all of Europe, and all of Africa.
	Man, the white race is so inclusive.
	And David Lammy.
	The only thing that's not white at this point is literally just the new world.
	Including Argentina.
	You mean the West Falklands.
	Daniel Williamson says, I thought whitewashing was meant to make it only about white people.
	I guess this brings a new meaning to it.
	Yeah, it's amazing, isn't it?
	We whitewashed the ethnic race report by pointing out that the other races are doing great.
	That's whitewashing.
	Okay.
	Weird flex.
	Again, I'll check in with Keir Starmer.
	James Stevens.
	"The race grifters denying the report are one thing, but it's good to hear the rejection of the concept of racist Britain.
	But I also don't like the fact that the race report gets praised as 'progress'.
	Inequality is a natural part of the world, the outcome of the system is uniform, it only tells you that it is not free." That's a good point.
	You would not expect to find equality or equity in any other metric.
	Why expect it for success?
	Well, it's because we literally have privileges for races that are non-white in this country.
	We've got lots and lots of examples of it, and it appears that they actually have had an effect.
	So at least the left can shut the hell up.
	Brad P. Nigerian immigrants.
	Become the most successful group in the country.
	Leftists.
	Why would the white supremacy do this?
	That's a great question.
	I love it.
	Okay, so maybe this is a white pill.
	Maybe this is a good day today.
	That guy previously, the previous comment, did actually make a good point about the fact that it's annoying to call this progress.
	But it's the point we've made before.
	Like, it's great to have Kemi Badenoch and Liz Truss in the Equality Department showing everything to be nonsense, but the Equality Department shouldn't exist.
	There just should not be a department at all.
	Oh, yeah.
	I mean, this all sounds like something out of the Soviet Union to me.
	The Women's Inequalities Commission.
	It's like, this is a case, comrade.
	I don't think any of this should exist, but it does exist.
	At least we can watch it destroying itself and have a laugh.
	Justin says, Yeah, and it seems that there are going to be loads of people from Africa who would agree with that.
	Loads of those Africans who just...
	Keep putting the Caribbean's...
	No, no, no jokes.
	No jokes.
	No jokes.
	Jason says, having people be accountable for their own actions.
	I don't know, it sounds racist.
	They're going to have to be responsible for their own failures.
	Yes.
	Yep.
	Chad, yes.
	Just get out.
	Bad news.
	Robbie, I can't read that out.
	It's like, bad news.
	You were the one who took the pill.
	Can you see Robbie's comment?
	Let me scroll.
	Scroll down to the bottom of the...
	Which page?
	The...
	I don't know.
	I don't see the pages on the one I've got.
	It's right at the very bottom.
	Robbie Cooper.
	I don't think I can read it out.
	I don't think I should.
	Are you saying I should read it out?
	No, I'm just saying you should laugh at it because it's really, really fucking funny.
	Have I gone too far?
	It's just about the Pimlico bit.
	Oh.
	Uh...
	I can say that.
	I don't think we should say that.
	I mean, I basically have said that.
	No, I don't think we should say that.
	It's really, really funny, though, Robbie.
	If anyone wants to know, go look at the comments and find Robbie Coopers.
	I'm not going to say it, but I can allude to it.
	So this is the Kemi Baden-Ock position, because you remember when she was in Parliament and they're talking about how, wow, we used to enslave people and sell them off to the white man.
	And then there was a statement from her where she went, Yeah, my people tried to take over the world once.
	Unfortunately, we failed.
	And then moved on to complain about how slavery wasn't as big as the deal as I think it was Dawn Butler was making out because literally everyone engaged in it.
	This is not the white man's fault, Dawn.
	But yeah, the West Africans were the ones who essentially won that debate.
	Anyway...
	Anyway, Stuart says, Hi guys, welcome to Room 101.
	Sorry, Podcast 101.
	Damn, I should have called it that.
	God, that would have been a great name.
	Keep up the great work.
	For Carl, light is invisible as it needs another surface to reflect off it in order for it to be seen, and so it is the surface that is light, not the light itself.
	However, the light is never considered to be dark, and its very nature is the opposite of darkness.
	By this logic, water is wet.
	No, water is the thing that makes things wet.
	And it's the surface, it's the modification of the light ray that gives you the impression of colour on the surface, so the content that you are receiving can't be from the surface because it requires the light, therefore it's in the light beam itself.
	Fight me.
	This isn't settled.
	We had this debate in the office the other day.
	I just said it.
	Very longly.
	But essentially, does light exist as it exists, or does it exist when the observer observes it?
	Well, it needs to reflect off an object for its properties to change to sufficiently appear to be blue to us, for example.
	What do you mean?
	You can get sun that's blue, that's averaging blue light.
	You don't need a surface.
	Sure, but the point is the surface is not itself inherently blue.
	There's no surface.
	I'm talking about if there's a blue sun, source of light, going straight into your eyes.
	There's no surface there.
	Yeah, but it's the wavelength or whatever, right?
	Yeah.
	And so if you need a surface to change the wavelength of a piece of light, a ray of light then bounces into your eyes.
	Surface here, again.
	No, but...
	What are you talking about?
	The question is, is colour an intrinsic property of an object?
	Oh, that's a different question.
	Yes.
	And so I don't know why you keep talking about blue sun.
	Because that's not what we're talking about.
	No, but if the wavelength is the wavelength we describe as blue and it comes straight from the source, doesn't bounce off the surface and go into you or any of that nonsense, and it goes straight into the observer, is it blue when the observer sees it or is it blue because its wavelength equals X? Yeah, good question.
	But it's blue because its wavelength equals X, right?
	But if it requires the object to bounce off to change its wavelength and then hits you in the eye, then the surface itself contains no colour blue.
	I don't want to get into this argument again.
	That's because I'll win.
	Ignacio says, hey guys, seeing the rise of criminality all over the West, I have really been reevaluating my previous position on the death penalty.
	I, for most of my life, found it absolutely distasteful and a thing of a previous era, but right now I'm getting to the point where I don't think criminals understand anything else than the threat of death.
	The problem, right, is that studies do show that the death penalty doesn't actually change criminality levels.
	And I guess that it comes from the fact that criminals don't think they're going to get caught when they're committing a crime.
	Otherwise they wouldn't do it.
	And so I actually am viewing it in more sort of as a retributive justice perspective, as in if you do something sufficiently horrible, then why should you be left alive?
	You know, if you do something sufficiently awful...
	You know, you kidnap and torture and rape a kid or something.
	Yeah, you should die.
	Well, just the Reading stabbing, for example.
	I mean, that was the story we covered here that changed my opinion.
	I was just looking at it.
	This guy was committed of a terror offence before.
	He was released.
	He then went into the park in Reading, stabbed, I think it was three people to death, and then has been given a whole life order, meaning we're happy to kill him, but we're going to keep him in there until he dies.
	Yeah.
	Well, why not just kill him?
	But that's missing what I think is an essential moral component, is that I think that there are some people, when you do some act, the appropriate moral response to that act is your execution.
	Well, killing three people after being released.
	Yeah, I mean, that's pretty high.
	Pretty high up on anything.
	I mean, I think there are worse things you can do than that, obviously.
	Yeah, of course, but I don't think you even need to go to the extremes to make the argument.
	No, that's probably true.
	I mean, who's arguing for releasing of the Reading Stabber?
	Yeah, I mean, the only proviso I'd put on it, really, is that you'd have to have a pretty high threshold of evidence.
	So you'd have to be beyond any kind of doubt, not just reasonable doubt, beyond the chance that it wasn't this thing.
	Because you don't want to accidentally execute an innocent man, but...
	At the end of the day, if there is no doubt that is...
	Ergo the whole lifelorder.
	I mean, you can only give that when there's no doubt that the man beats the man.
	Exactly.
	So, hang him.
	Why are we even discussing this?
	Why shouldn't we give that guy the death penalty rather than wait 50 years?
	Because he was like 20-something as well.
	He's going to be in there forever.
	Yeah, and it's exactly the same principle.
	So, why not just save us some taxpayer dollars?
	Yeah.
	Joey Reynolds says, How do the left get to claim the word progressive?
	Going back to failed socialist policies isn't progress.
	The right may have dog whistles, but the left masks their words.
	Well, I think the left uses dog whistles all the time, to be honest.
	And you're a good point, actually.
	Socialism is not progress.
	There is nothing progressive about being a socialist.
	It's very regressive.
	The 20th century and the unbelievable body count that it's stacked up is a testimony to how bad socialism is for humanity.
	And yet the socialists think they're good people.
	It's weird, isn't it?
	Armin says, Hi Carl, hello to the team, thanks for the great work.
	As I was thinking yesterday about the downsides to individualism, as collectivists love to point out, I've come to a single conclusion.
	Individualistic society will not survive without high standards for personal responsibility.
	Correct.
	Irresponsible people seem to all gravitate around this morally weakened state.
	The world just now happens around them.
	Not taking responsibility for one's own actions, Guardian, I hope you're listening, seems to me often rooted in the belief of the worthlessness of their actions.
	Yes, there's a good way of viewing it.
	This allows for mental weakness and state of helplessness, for less fortunate or any lack of talent on one hand and a cutthroat, principle-less, amoral actors on the other.
	Needless to say, a society overflowing with such people is doomed to fail.
	The weak will start sacrificing their individualism for leverage, further delegating their responsibilities.
	Furthermore, individualists are, let's face it, pretty useless at creating movements to oppose such immoral thinking.
	That's fair.
	That's our position.
	We are trying to argue morals to people who grew up not believing their actions have consequences, argue ethics to people who have grown in a big city and never had anything other than but everyone is out for themselves, argue individualism to people who believe in themselves too weak to survive on their own, and honestly, judging from who usually opposes individualism, I'd say they're right.
	Well, that's interesting, because what's fascinating is all socialist movements, and this was commented upon, like, in Lenin's day, you know, it's like they take the scum of society, forge them together into a victim class, and then...
	A band of murderers.
	A band of murderers, and then engage in their communist revolution.
	Same thing in China, same thing in Russia, presumably the same thing in the other ones, although I haven't looked into the individuals in, like, Cambodia or anything, but I'm not going to be like...
	Pillars of the community.
	Paul Pot was probably a good guy until he joined the socialist movement.
	Willing to wager the opposite.
	Exactly.
	It's a way for really terrible people to justify really terrible actions and call themselves good.
	But he is right.
	We are terrible at forming cohesive movements.
	And I think a lot of it is because we're terrible at viewing ourselves as victims, to be honest.
	Also just the whole solidarity.
	I mean, the whole worldview they have is incredibly...
	I don't know what the word is.
	Unionistic or something?
	Yeah.
	It's very easy for them to just guarantee that they will work together and do this.
	Regimented.
	Yeah.
	Whereas we're concerned with individual freedoms and whatnot, so why would I... Yeah.
	Once you give the certain shibboleths and say, yes, I believe in diversity, equality and fraternity, whatever it is.
	Genocide.
	That's them.
	Yeah, they get to the fascist part eventually.
	Then you're in the club and it doesn't matter how bad your behavior is, the ridiculous things you advocate for or the terrible things you do, it is still people will defend you.
	Yeah.
	That's weird, because we don't do that.
	Well, I mean, literally, you can engage in genocide, and you get leftists being like, China didn't do nothing.
	There are loads of Soviet Union, like, defenders and apologists on social media.
	Yeah.
	I saw one, V did a video on one, going around on TikTok the other day, saying, oh, well, you may now have owned the land, but the government did, and that's good.
	And it's like, Why are you defending any of this?
	Even just looking back at history, like in the 50s, people denying that a whole of them all happened and things like this.
	Stalin didn't do nothing.
	It's just like, what's wrong with you?
	Yeah, it's so weird.
	Joel Lowry, does the retina inside the eye constitute a surface?
	For God's sakes.
	No, I'm not getting into this argument.
	It does, though, doesn't it?
	No, there is actually no answer.
	That's the problem here.
	There is an answer.
	There are answers, neither of them are proven.
	I'm saying yes.
	I haven't considered how that affects the rest of my argument yet.
	I don't care, I just want to argue.
	I just like the fact that it winds you up.
	There's a danger of martyrdom with capital punishment, says Gordon.
	Well, that's true, but I mean, you know, at the end of the day, I decide that or he gets to get out back in society and then carry on at some point.
	Apart from the guy with the whole life order.
	Charlie the Beagle says, Hey guys, currently up to my knees in muck and bilge water, wiring a boat.
	This podcast is making it easier.
	Also, Callum, thanks for the Orcs or Corks.
	Oh, that's nice.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Thank you, everyone, for watching.
	If you'd like to see more from us, you can go to Losers.com, sign up, become a premium member, and go and check out all of the free content we have.
	And we will be back tomorrow.
	And also tomorrow the book club will be up, John has assured me.
	So Brave New World analysis finally wrapped up with all of the thick concepts and ethical knowledge work that we've been putting into it.
	But in the meantime, we'll see you tomorrow.

▲